Do the Hanafis say that it is permissible to kill a Muslim in retaliation for a non-Muslim, and do they cite incorrect reports as evidence?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : What you mentioned regarding the issue that the Hanafis hold that a Muslim is killed in retaliation for a dhimmi, and that they cite reports and weak hadiths in opposition to authentic texts, and perhaps you also mentioned that they—meaning this is their reality—they cite the Qur'an, even if they did not understand the aspect of the argument in the verses they cite. I recall that our Shaykh, Dr. Rabee, responded to al-Ghazali
The Shaykh : The Shaykh : Who?
The questioner : The Shaykh : Rabee, in his response to al-Ghazali in his book "Uncovering al-Ghazali's Positions Regarding the Sunnah and Its People," reached through induction the conclusion that the early Hanafis and the imams of the Hanafis did not cite the Qur'an as evidence for this opposing madhhab, but rather they cited reports that scholars knew were not established. If it had been established for them what constitutes a valid argument and what scholars accept, and according to which they do not kill a Muslim in retaliation for a dhimmi, if it had been established for them, it would have been fitting for them to accept it and leave those reports that are not established. What is your comment on that? May Allah reward you. I mean, what our Shaykh reached, or have you read what he wrote in his book or not?
The questioner : Have you read what?
The questioner : What he mentionedThe Shaykh : in his book "Uncovering al-Ghazali's Position Regarding the Sunnah and Its People"?
The Shaykh : I think I understood something from you that I did not say, or I did not understand what you want, because there is some noise and some shouting in it.
The questioner : Perhaps I will clarify.
The Shaykh : Listen, if you please, I did not say that they argue with the Qur'an.
The questioner : I did not say that you said it, but I said that they argue, or their state, or the later ones among them argue.
The Shaykh : Are you saying?
The questioner : Yes, I am saying, I want your opinion on this issue, do you agree with our Shaykh or have you read what he wrote?
The Shaykh : I have not read that. What I know is that they do not argue with anything from the Qur'an, but they argue with the reports I mentioned, which occurred in the time of 'Uthman ibn 'Affan, and they are incorrect reports. And al-Mawdudi (may Allah have mercy on him) addressed this topic with some detail, supporting the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him). But I was afraid to say what I clarified when I cited the verse:[Al-Qalam 68:35-36] I would have liked the Hanafis to rely on this verse, because it is well known from their madhhab that they rely on the text of the Qur'an, even if it is specified by something from the Sunnah. I mentioned this with some detail, but here they did not turn to this verse in which the Lord of the Worlds condemns equating Muslims with criminals. But in answer to your question, I do not know—or at least—I do not recall that they cited anything from the Qur'an in their ruling on killing a Muslim in retaliation for a dhimmi, or in equating the blood money for accidental killing if the victim was a Muslim or if he was a disbeliever.
The questioner : The al-Ghazali who is being refuted, whom our Shaykh refuted, claims that and that the Hanafis cite the Qur'an. For this reason, he addressed this issue and investigated it thoroughly, saying that the Hanafis, their predecessors, did not cite [the Qur'an]. Perhaps I understood, and perhaps I was right or wrong—that except for their predecessors, the later ones, as I understood from our Shaykh's words and what he quoted, argued with the implications of some verses, even if they were mistaken in arguing with them.
The Shaykh : This is possible, but their argumentation would be with general texts whose clarification the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) provided through the Sunnah. "A life for a life" absolutely; this is a Jewish life, so a life for a life. But this argumentation is something that should be stopped at because of its weakness and extreme frailty, because arguing with general texts, as we say in another field, is one of the grave errors that must not be...
The questioner : The prayer.
The Shaykh : Come on, in the name of Allah, is there a mosque nearby here?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, the trip, if Allah wills, today we will pray Maghrib and combine it with 'Isha' as a combined prayer in advance, and we will depart, if Allah wills, so that we can perform 'Umrah before the Fajr prayer, if Allah wills.
The questioner : Was there not a necessity for the haste?
The Shaykh : The necessity is present, may Allah reward you, considering that I want to complete my treatment for my knee before the arrival of the 'Id during these remaining days. I visit the hospital, and I do not want to delay after Hajj in my country, because there are academic projects we have printed, and the printing press may be disrupted or delayed if I am delayed. So I want to seize this opportunity and visit the hospital there before the arrival of Hajj. Therefore, we have decided, and we ask Allah for ease, to travel tonight after the Maghrib and 'Isha' combined prayer in advance, if Allah wills. So we ask for your prayers. Come on.
The questioner : I entrust you to Allah...
The Shaykh : No, we are not returning.
The Shaykh : The Shaykh : Who?
The questioner : The Shaykh : Rabee, in his response to al-Ghazali in his book "Uncovering al-Ghazali's Positions Regarding the Sunnah and Its People," reached through induction the conclusion that the early Hanafis and the imams of the Hanafis did not cite the Qur'an as evidence for this opposing madhhab, but rather they cited reports that scholars knew were not established. If it had been established for them what constitutes a valid argument and what scholars accept, and according to which they do not kill a Muslim in retaliation for a dhimmi, if it had been established for them, it would have been fitting for them to accept it and leave those reports that are not established. What is your comment on that? May Allah reward you. I mean, what our Shaykh reached, or have you read what he wrote in his book or not?
The questioner : Have you read what?
The questioner : What he mentionedThe Shaykh : in his book "Uncovering al-Ghazali's Position Regarding the Sunnah and Its People"?
The Shaykh : I think I understood something from you that I did not say, or I did not understand what you want, because there is some noise and some shouting in it.
The questioner : Perhaps I will clarify.
The Shaykh : Listen, if you please, I did not say that they argue with the Qur'an.
The questioner : I did not say that you said it, but I said that they argue, or their state, or the later ones among them argue.
The Shaykh : Are you saying?
The questioner : Yes, I am saying, I want your opinion on this issue, do you agree with our Shaykh or have you read what he wrote?
The Shaykh : I have not read that. What I know is that they do not argue with anything from the Qur'an, but they argue with the reports I mentioned, which occurred in the time of 'Uthman ibn 'Affan, and they are incorrect reports. And al-Mawdudi (may Allah have mercy on him) addressed this topic with some detail, supporting the madhhab of Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him). But I was afraid to say what I clarified when I cited the verse:
(35) Then will We treat the Muslims like the criminals? (36) What is [the matter] with you? How do you judge?
أَفَنَجْعَلُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ كَالْمُجْرِمِينَ مَا لَكُمْ كَيْفَ تَحْكُمُونَThe questioner : The al-Ghazali who is being refuted, whom our Shaykh refuted, claims that and that the Hanafis cite the Qur'an. For this reason, he addressed this issue and investigated it thoroughly, saying that the Hanafis, their predecessors, did not cite [the Qur'an]. Perhaps I understood, and perhaps I was right or wrong—that except for their predecessors, the later ones, as I understood from our Shaykh's words and what he quoted, argued with the implications of some verses, even if they were mistaken in arguing with them.
The Shaykh : This is possible, but their argumentation would be with general texts whose clarification the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) provided through the Sunnah. "A life for a life" absolutely; this is a Jewish life, so a life for a life. But this argumentation is something that should be stopped at because of its weakness and extreme frailty, because arguing with general texts, as we say in another field, is one of the grave errors that must not be...
The questioner : The prayer.
The Shaykh : Come on, in the name of Allah, is there a mosque nearby here?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, the trip, if Allah wills, today we will pray Maghrib and combine it with 'Isha' as a combined prayer in advance, and we will depart, if Allah wills, so that we can perform 'Umrah before the Fajr prayer, if Allah wills.
The questioner : Was there not a necessity for the haste?
The Shaykh : The necessity is present, may Allah reward you, considering that I want to complete my treatment for my knee before the arrival of the 'Id during these remaining days. I visit the hospital, and I do not want to delay after Hajj in my country, because there are academic projects we have printed, and the printing press may be disrupted or delayed if I am delayed. So I want to seize this opportunity and visit the hospital there before the arrival of Hajj. Therefore, we have decided, and we ask Allah for ease, to travel tonight after the Maghrib and 'Isha' combined prayer in advance, if Allah wills. So we ask for your prayers. Come on.
The questioner : I entrust you to Allah...
The Shaykh : No, we are not returning.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.